Wrong on both counts. It was India's tour of Pakistan in 2006. First two matches were draws and not a peep from the Indians. In the third and final match, India lost by 300+ runs and Chappell whined.

If you're going to moan about someone's action, do it after winning. Otherwise:

Nope. If you were referring to the 2006 series, there were reports that India made a complaint after the second test in Faisalabad (Shoaib went for 1/100), which were later denied. Chappell's comments happened after India's first innings at Karachi had completed in which Shoaib picked 2/70. India did go on to lose that test but Shoaib had little role to play in it.

I do think there is something to the whole people only care when he's taking lots of wickets angle. Kane Williamson and Marlon Samuels definitely have worse actions to the naked eye but they don't take enough wickets for people give a ****. I certainly don't think we'd have a 200 post thread about Ajmal if he averaged 37 with the ball.

Of course we wouldn't. Nobody gives a **** about any kind of cheat if ultimately their cheating is ineffective. ****ing ridiculous of people to cite it as some sort of sour grapes.

If some geezer who always middled in the TDF was a known doper who got away with it, would anyone be as bothered by that as Armstrong's antics? Of course not and nor should they be.

To say it should only be brought up when you've beaten the team containing the chucker is ludicrous, given his flouting of the rules significantly lessens your chance of victory.

How far away is the technology to bowl in match conditions with the flexion tracker? The whole question of bend and hyper extension isn't going to go away at any level - heck, even at local league and county rep level it's a talking point; there's one boy in my current squad whose action looks dodgy to the eye but can straighten his arm to about 20 degrees beyond horizontal...

Originally Posted by Son Of Coco

What doesn't do them any favours is that they seem to have technology that does all this marvellous stuff, yet isn't good enough to use on a regular basis - see the tech that they used to state 99% of bowlers throw...has never been seen in action again. Despite the fact there are new players on the scene, at least some of whom might be Sarwans and not (going on ICC tech) everyone else.

The main problem with the ICC and chucking is a lack of will to actually address the issue.

Yeah, basically this.

There's apparently no effort being made to have live, real time technology to confirm the legality of deliveries within a match.

I love watching Saeed Ajmal bowl, and I believe that he's certainly proved that he can bowl the doosra within the 15 degree limit.

But every bowler can bowl with their foot behind the bowling crease too.

Coming around the wicket to a right hander and bowling a doosra seems to me like something that would be very, very difficult to do legally.

Not saying it's impossible, just that there are certain scenarios in which a bowler may be more likely to be less rigid with his action.

That's why there needs to be some goal towards live match technology.

I find it much easier in that fashion when I "bowl" one.

You're trying to get your wrist right around the ball, so your elbow ends up more inward than a stock delivery. It makes the ball harder to push out in a straight line, but easier to pull across your body. Just like what you do from around the wicket to a right hander.

The way people still going on about it you'd think it's 1990s again, it's been 2 decades already, just buckle up and get on with the game. Expect the whining poms to start whinging again, 3-0 was a long time ago.

1) his action looks ugly and dodgy as ****
2) we don't really know the process behind analyzing his action so saying the results are all wrong and he's chucking because i can see it is really a poor argument.
3) he's probably bowling within the legal limit (unless he'svsome sort of scheming mastermind that alters his action by a few degrees during lab tests) but this legal limit should be changed (what uv wants iirc)
4) ajmal > swann
5) amla is now an atg

You're trying to get your wrist right around the ball, so your elbow ends up more inward than a stock delivery. It makes the ball harder to push out in a straight line, but easier to pull across your body. Just like what you do from around the wicket to a right hander.

Interesting. I've only tried it a few times but it's more an issue of getting the shoulder to come round for me.

Originally Posted by Daemon

Can we at least agree that

1) his action looks ugly and dodgy as ****
2) we don't really know the process behind analyzing his action so saying the results are all wrong and he's chucking because i can see it is really a poor argument.
3) he's probably bowling within the legal limit (unless he'svsome sort of scheming mastermind that alters his action by a few degrees during lab tests) but this legal limit should be changed (what uv wants iirc)
4) ajmal > swann
5) amla is now an atg

Don't completely agree with 1, but definitely disagree with 3.

15 degrees is fine by me but it's the italics part that we have no means of testing. That's the issue. Bowling in a lab simply does not mean you're going to bowl that way on the field.

not the limit. the idea that a degree of simple straightening constitutes a chuck

for instance i can roll my arm over quite easily with a very low degree of bend change with a chucking action. i can also roll my arm over with a greater than 15 degree change in bend (hint: straighten the elbow slowly) and it's no chuck

1) his action looks ugly and dodgy as ****
2) we don't really know the process behind analyzing his action so saying the results are all wrong and he's chucking because i can see it is really a poor argument.
3) he's probably bowling within the legal limit (unless he'svsome sort of scheming mastermind that alters his action by a few degrees during lab tests) but this legal limit should be changed (what uv wants iirc)
4) ajmal > swann
5) amla is now an atg